Part of me agrees with those who say that participating in buybacks only pads their numbers but if its 'for the children' I guess I can overlook it.

I've often thought of buying a bunch of $80 Mosin Nagants and turning them in at a buyback for $100 and a quick $20/gun, but there are no buybacks in my area. Hell, the local teener baseball league has a gun raffle as a fundraiser. How cool is that. One of the local churches has a 'Day at the Range' as a ministry event. It fills up very quickly an if you don't get tickets at least a month ahead, you don't go. Big cities suck!!!

Although I can understand the point of view of those of you who are critical of this act, I am still coming down firmly on the "well done" side until you can convince me otherwise. The guy made a mockery of their buyback, publicized it, and then used the proceeds for a worthy cause. I see the benefits well into the plus side, especially if it receives enough publicity.

I can see in post #30 of this thread, that you are very active in helping the anti-gunners Illinois.

You should be proud that you state is one of the most restrictive states, in regards to firearm ownership.
Keep giving them ammo against your cause and keep trying to convince yourself that you are sticking it to them.

How much would they have to offer you for you to give up your right to own firearms? (You have already shown that your 2A support can be bought)
At least then you would get your big payoff and only be hurting your own rights, instead of slowly helping to erode everyones rights away.

The more "successful" that these buy-backs are the more that they will try to relate "less guns on the street, less crime" and it will be easier to garner support for anti-gun legislation in the future.

Originally posted by Knotthead:
The guy made a mockery of their buyback, publicized it

Click to expand...

If you can show me that they got just as much publicity as the Buy-back received, then I may be inclined to partially agree with you. The buy-back made national news, posting in a few message boards doesn't come close to balancing the scales. Show me an AP release on the failures of the gun buy-back due to the actions of the original poster.

Think about it this way - By most accounts of those who have participated in Buy-Backs, including the one posted here by Templar223, the vast majority of those turning in guns are older folks, who might have an old revolver or two in the attic, or a few enterprising folks who collect junk guns just for these events.

Nowhere is there any mention of an overwhelming criminal turnout to these things. Sure, they'll come in dribs and drabs, but the crime guns are just not there when it comes down to it. They're being held onto by the criminals that these buybacks are supposed to disarm.

If every single law-abiding individual who has ever turned in a gun to one of these programs had NEVER gone, how long do you think these programs would have lasted?

Not very long at all. Not after the third or fourth disappointing press conference by the anti's in charge, not after the third or fourth time they had to stand in front of all-but-empty tables at their news conferences. It's people like us who are keeping these things going. We try to make a quick buck turning in starter pistols, or capguns, or old busted chunks of rust that were once guns to mess with the anti's who don't know the difference. But WE'RE the ones who keep them in business!

But I guess that's ok - I mean heck, it's like Templar said - why would they bother giving the guns away to companies like Numrich, who will make the parts available to shooters to fix their own guns, or to groups who would teach people how to fix and maintain guns? Much better to just give 'em up, grab that cash and move on. Who cares if they work or not, or whether it's easy to find the ammo anymore, right?

Although I can understand the point of view of those of you who are critical of this act, I am still coming down firmly on the "well done" side until you can convince me otherwise. The guy made a mockery of their buyback, publicized it, and then used the proceeds for a worthy cause. I see the benefits well into the plus side, especially if it receives enough publicity.

Click to expand...

Unless it can be proven that 100% of the funds for this buyback were provided by private parties and not taxpayer dollars, I can't call this "well done" at all.

The guy made a mockery of their buyback, but getting non-gun owners in a decidedly anti-gun state to understand that will be tough, at best. So that brings us back to square one. He knowingly gave up WORKING guns, but somehow that's ok to him because they're chambered in obscure calibers or maybe not fully functional. And he came right out and stated that those same working guns were "scrap metal", which when you think about it is a pretty damn ANTI way of looking at a working firearm. AND, when it was suggested that he donate or sell the guns to a gun-parts dealer or donate them to a gunsmithing school, he said what amounts to "sure, as long as they'll give me the $100 the gun grabbers did for 'em!"

I have to agree w/ Kingpin and some others. It seems like payback, justice, etc., but you just fed the movement for the anti's.

There are much better ways to raise funds for youth NRA programs.

IMO, I think you just betrayed the integrity of the NRA and the youth programs you are trying to fund. What kind of example are you setting for the kids in those programs you "raised money for"?

I can see why you did it and the motivation behind it, but I think you should have thought this through a little bit more. I feel that this goes against the founding philosophy of THR and should be removed.

You guys that are bashing him for "helping the antis" seem to be overlooking the fact that they are taking the money raised and buying guns and ammo for a youth shooting program. Nothing helps the antis less than getting more youth interested in the sport and teaching them safe gun handling skills.

I don't care if it is tax dollars or private funds, that is money well spent.

So the antis get to make a press release that says "We took 10,000 guns off the streets." As has been mentioned, very few of those guns were in working order, and not too many belonged to criminals. By that logic, this won't affect the crime rate at all. Now we can say, "look, they took 10,000 guns off the streets, but crime stayed the same. I guess it wasn't the guns that were the problem."

"So the antis get to make a press release that says "We took 10,000 guns off the streets." As has been mentioned, very few of those guns were in working order, and not too many belonged to criminals. "

No offense, but you are missing the point. It doesn't matter if the guns were in working order - the anti's don't know the difference. To them, a gun is a gun. There are probably a lot of collectors, gun schools, amateur gunsmith's, etc., that would love to get their hands on some of those guns. Besides that, he played into the "buy back" program - which helps their cause. It doesn't matter if he raised some funds to help w/ a good cause - he helped a bad cause in doing so.

Please think about this everyone. This was not a noble deed. It may have gotten some money for a good program but in the long run, it feeds the anti movement and betrays our 2A rights.

No, I'm not missing the point. I see your point, I just have a differing opinion on the topic.

If an anti gun organization offered you $2 million for your Remington 870, would you turn it down? In matters of principle, the dollar amount should not matter. Think of everything you could do to support gun rights with $2 million. Think of the staff you could hire to write letters to politicians, and the campaign contributions you could make to support pro gun legislators. Think of all the guns you could buy for yourself, which might sound selfish but each new gun you buy supports a firearms manufacturer.

But you would turn down that deal, right? Because it doesn't matter what you do to help so long as you got the money from an anti gun organization buy back program.

but in the long run, it feeds the anti movement and betrays our 2A rights.

Click to expand...

No, this is what it may do in the short run. In the LONG run, a youth program (the youth being the future of both the shooting sports and the RKBA fight) is funded and children learn how to shoot and safely handle firearms.

I think a lot of you that are vehemently opposed to what Templar did are missing the bigger picture here.

The best way to make these stupid and useless publicity events like gun buy backs stop is to make them look stupid. The one thing people like Daley can't stand is being laughed at and that's what happened here.

Daley, Jackson, Pfleger and the rest of their crew were made laughingstocks.

The best part is they don't even know they were scammed yet, but the word will get out soon enough.

The Tribune LTTE Monday had a letter questioning where the guns came from, who provided the money and asked if they ever really did any "good" since they seem to have one every year.

I'd love to see a bigger chunk of George Soros or the Joyce Foundations money being recycled back into the shooting sports like this with every gun buy back.

My wife even suggested that I start picking some junk guns up for the next one as a smart way to fund my bad habits.

I just have to fight the temptation to fix or restore things like that darn 1901 Hopkins and Allen Overhand my father gave me to get rid of.

You want to stop gun buy backs, take their money and laugh in their face after you cash the check or use the cards.

In fact get some nice pictures of the gun you bought with their money and send it to the newspapers with a caption: "Mayor Richard M. Daley 2007 Commemorative Target Rifle, awarded yearly to teach gun safety and the shooting sports to youth in Illinois."

If an anti gun organization offered you $2 million for your Remington 870, would you turn it down? In matters of principle, the dollar amount should not matter. Think of everything you could do to support gun rights with $2 million. Think of the staff you could hire to write letters to politicians, and the campaign contributions you could make to support pro gun legislators. Think of all the guns you could buy for yourself, which might sound selfish but each new gun you buy supports a firearms manufacturer.

But you would turn down that deal, right? Because it doesn't matter what you do to help so long as you got the money from an anti gun organization buy back program.

They will track the prepaid card numbers and see some of the cards were used for shooting goodies HAHAHA. It will also start a few more young shooters on a life long hobby.

Also the word will get around on what you did and they will not let you do it again. Remember they took your picture! I'll bet anything that next year your pic will be behind the desk at the next gun buyback and you will have alot more good cop bad cop to deal with.

This guy gets cash for non-functioning firearms (or ones without a supply of ammunition) and buys new guns and ammo for a youth marksmanship program and you consider him an anti? How exactly does a non-functioning firearm serve 2nd amendment goals? He's increased the quantity and quality of functioning firearms in private ownership at the expense of either tax $ or a gun-grabber's private donations. He did the right thing.

Someone said he has "already shown that your 2A support can be bought". No, he showed that he can use the system to fund programs to expand 2A support. He did the right thing.

The PR for the program is not an issue. Very few criminals are turning in firearms, so most of these people are disarming themselves. What is it that happens when people are disarmed? This won't cause a decrease in gun violence in Chicago. The stats will show that gun buy-backs correlate to increased gun-violence. He did the right thing.

Waterhouse puts it in right perspective when he asks about selling an 870 for $2 million. He did the right thing.

Instead of bitching about a non-existant problem, do something productive and copy this guy's article to everyone you know. DO THE RIGHT THING.

I don't see how he helped the anti's one bit. They already lie about the numbers and types of weapons recovered. The past few buy backs, they have shown the same exact "AK47" and "SMG" that they "took off the streets".

Taking the money out of the hands of Antis is NOT helping them. Sure, theyre going to make up some "convincing" false statistics to support their jingoistic crusade, but they do that anyway. I say strip 'em of their cash any way we can.

people who are bonking him need to look at this in a more long-term view. those kids he gets to shoot will be MUCH more valuable as voters and citizens in the long run than being able to say for 30 seconds on the radio/tv "hah, nobody wants to participate in your stupid gun buy back".

recently, there was a buy back here in Los Angeles at the first ame. pretty much nobody showed up. they netted I think one crap handgun and an sks. when they interviewed the cop handling it he said, well, if all this gets even ONE gun off the street I'll feel like I've done my job (or soemthing like that)

it was so stupid I was laughing for a while.

he also tried to say that the sks is just as powerful as an AK, but by then the reporter and lost interest and was back to obliquely making fun of the fact that people might be surprised that no one in one of the highest crime neighborhoods in LA wants to turn in their guns.

I would have taken the day off and driven down from Milwaukee! Amongst the good stuff, my grandfather's estate has enough euro-trash revolvers, and (broken, out of time) Iver Johnsons not worth even $25, at $100 a pop, to buy something really nice, maybe a PS90...

I think I'm going to start buying junk/broken guns whenever I see them for a few dollars, and save them in a big box in the corner of my basment for a buy-back like that.

All of you who are bashing him are nothing but keyboard commandos, and are getting off on being hard-cases...

The best way to really stick it to Dailey would be to hold a press conference and explain exactly what you did. That would help point out the stupidity of these gun buy-backs and call into question how much they really accomplish. THAT would be priceless. You'd get the money AND undermine their propaganda.

Look at it this way. Even if he hadn't turned in those guns, they'd be trumpeting the X-number -27 guns as a huge success in the war on gun crime, and how safer the streets will be now that the evil things are off the streets. Even one gun turned in is a success, in their minds.
I also am looking at the bigger picture. Sure, tear the guns down or ship them off to a smithing school, they're still in the hands of people who already like guns. By turning them in, getting a lot more cash than they're worth, and using that money to fund Youth Gun programs is effectively putting guns into the hands of many, many more that will come after us. People who will eventually continue the fight to keep our freedoms.

Isn't that worth contributing to a lie, that everyone knows is a lie, and doesn't do jack squat for the crime rate? Heck, should this post hit the mainstream, it'd make more of a laughing-stock of Daley than anything. I'm tempted to suggest sending it in to Hannity or Rush, just for the exposure, but I'm afraid the grabbers might change the rules to screw up the plan.

Were this a trade in to use the cash for self, I'd be less enthused with it, but if it's "for the children" in the form of a youth program, then I'm all for it.

I think there should be a general consensus that anyone that trades a "worthless" gun in should donate the proceeds to a youth shooting program. Would that make those of you entirely against trade-ins happy?

The best way to really stick it to Dailey would be to hold a press conference and explain exactly what you did. That would help point out the stupidity of these gun buy-backs and call into question how much they really accomplish. THAT would be priceless. You'd get the money AND undermine their propaganda.

Click to expand...

+1

Or...

Why not submit this very well written post as an editorial to the local papers where you live? Or the New York Times? Or Fox News online...they would run this....

Shhh! don't give the secrets away.
In most places, they already know know that gun buybacks are a sham. If it makes sheeple in places like Chicago feel good about themselves and allows gun owners to turn junk into gold, why change that?

Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.

This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.